Relationship of Age, Gender, Tenure, Rank and Job Satisfaction ...

International Journal of Contemporary Business Studies 

Vol: 3, No: 6. June, 2012 ISSN 2156-7506 

Available online at http://www.akpinsight.webs.com 

International Journal of 

Contemporary Business Studies 

Vol: 3, No: 6. June, 2012 

Pp15-27 

©Academy of Knowledge Process 

Relationship of Age, Gender, Tenure, Rank 

and Job Satisfaction- Empirical Evidence 

from Business Institute of Pakistan 

Dr. Niaz Ahmed Bhutto 

Associate Professor 

Sukkur Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur, PAKISTAN 

Naveed Anwar (Correspondence Author) 

Research Scholar 

Sukkur Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur, PAKISTAN 

& 

Faculty Member 

Shaheed Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Institute of Science and Technology, Larkana, Pakistan 

Hyder Ali Khawaja 

Faculty Member & Research Scholar 

Sukkur Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur, Pakistan 

ABSTRACT 

Job satisfaction is widely studied area by many researchers around the 

globe. Especially Job satisfaction among the teaching staff of higher 

education institutes had been an area of curiosity for both management as 

well as the policy makers. The lack of quality and dedicated staff is a 

dying need of every education institute. Most of the qualified staff is 

migrating to other countries and those presently working as teachers have 

many concerns with their jobs. Thus, a comprehensive study was 

required in this domain with a special reference to Pakistani context. The 

main objective of this study is to measure the job satisfaction level of the 

faculty members, those who work with business institutes of Pakistan, 

and to find the relationship of overall job satisfaction level with variables 

like age, gender, tenure and rank. Convenience sampling method was 

adopted to select the sample for research.The sample (N= 191) consisted 

upon the faculty members of business institutes of four provinces of 

Pakistan, Sindh, Punjab, Baluchistan and Khyber Pahtoon Khaw. Both 

genders male as well as females have participated as respondents. 

Samples were having different salary levels ranging from 1 to 8 scales, 

categorized in to the following ranks: Professor, Associate Professor, 

Assistant Professor, and Lecturers. The Job Description Index (JDI) and 

a biographical questionnaire were administered to collect the data. The 

instrument used for research JDI is a reliable tool to measure the overall 

satisfaction level based on five main facets, staff relationship with people 

or coworker, the satisfaction with pay staff receive, the quality of 

Copyright © 2012. Academy of Knowledge Process 

15




1. INTRODUCTION 

supervision, the chances of promotions in organization and the 

satisfaction with the job being performed by the staff.The results of the 

study showed that the faculty members of business institutes in Pakistan 

(included in sample) have shown their satisfaction with the nature of 

work, coworkers or the people along with they are working, followed by 

the supervision they received in their organizations. Chances for 

promotion and salary (pay) were the main sources for job dissatisfaction. 

The relationship among overall job satisfaction, rank of staff and tenure 

was found be significant. Age and job satisfaction was positively related, 

whereas gender was found to be as the weakest predictors of overall job 

satisfaction. Though study indicate a relationship among overall job 

satisfaction and other variables such as age , gender, tenure and rank and 

also with five aspects of job satisfaction used in JDI but there is a need 

for continuous research to find the relationship among job satisfaction 

and other extraneous variables. 

Key Words: Job Satisfaction, Faculty members, Business Institutes, Pakistan 

The main focus of this study is job satisfaction level of the employees of business institutes under certain 

indicators. An attempt has been made to find out those indicators which can increase or decrease the job 

satisfaction level of faculty members.As far education sector is concern, Pakistan is facing immense 

challenges, in term of low literacy rate, less number of quality educational institutes, poor facilities and 

more important the low motivation level of many of those who are the knowledge workers, the main 

pillars of educational sectors, of course the faculty. 

Keeping in views above mentioned problems, it is a daunting task for both management of the 

universities and more important the Government, to take really focused efforts to enhance the quality of 

education and provide better opportunities to the young generation. To provide quality facilities, updated 

courses related to 21 st century, highly motivated teachers, teachers those who can lead the young 

generation towards success .The problems of educational sectors can only be removed when, faculty, 

management and the policy makers can join their hands together to overcome the issues faced by the 

education sector of Pakistan. 

Job satisfaction has become a buzz world in educational institutes as well as in other organizations. Job 

satisfaction is the most important factor, which every organization dream to cultivate in their staff. Much 

of the research work in this area has analyzed that turnover, absenteeism; job roles and extra jobs 

behavior are the main factors which affect on job attitude of staff. Satisfaction is an outcome of the 

reinforce system of the organization and the needs of the staff (Lofquist & Dawis, 1969, p.53). In Another 

research (Locke, 1976) indicated that it is a positive inner drive that one gets out of the good appraisal of 

his or her job. Job satisfaction is sense of happiness that staff will feel when they fulfill their tasks and 

they achieve their results (Locke & Henne, 1986, p.21) and further Porter et al. (1975) found that it is a 

feeling that one gets when he / she achieve his or her goals. Job satisfaction has been researched since 

many years in and outside Pakistan; a lot of researches have been conducted on the topic. Great deal of 

literature is available which is focused on explain job satisfaction and factors affecting the level of job 

satisfaction among staff and how job satisfaction is related with the job, people along with staff works, 

supervision that they get , salary , working environment, organizational rules, and policies and the 

chances of promotion . Majority of published work found that job satisfaction is about balance among 


16




desired and actual outcomes of a job. That mean, whatever staff desired from a job and what they get out 

of it define the level of their job satisfaction. Unfortunately, there is lack of empirical research in Pakistan 

on job satisfaction related to Academic institutes, in term of indicators of the overall job satisfaction. As, 

the management of universities is trying their level best to provide a conducive working environment to 

faculty and want to enhance level of job satisfaction, so that teachers can give their maximum 

performance in term of teaching, administration and research. Job satisfaction is a key domain of study 

which not only interest staff but it is also a grey area for most of the employers, where they are trying to 

comprehend the different aspects of it. By knowing the relationship of these variables with job 

satisfaction higher education institutes management will be able to understand the hidden aspect which 

may cause impact on the overall job satisfaction level of faulty members and more important to take 

corrective actions to enhance the job satisfaction among faculty members. Though ,much research have 

been conducted to explain these concepts related to job satisfaction, i.e. job satisfaction factors and, job 

dissatisfaction factors (which will be reviewed on coming pages) but there is a great need for a study in 

Pakistan that could explain the indicators of overall job satisfaction. 

The key aspiration of this research is to investigate the overall job satisfaction among faculty members of 

business institutes and to investigate the type of relationship among the overall job satisfaction with 

different biographical variable such as age, tenure, gender and the ranks of the staff. This research will try 

to validate the relationship of job satisfaction and above-mentioned variables, that either they have any 

impact on job satisfaction or not. 

Teachers always talk about job satisfaction but do they really know about what motivates them? What 

satisfy or dissatisfy them the most? Is there any relationship among the age, rank, tenure and gender of 

faculty and their overall job satisfaction level? The main issue is not to know the job satisfaction level of 

staff but the crust of the matter is to find out the why people vary when it come to job satisfaction level, 

How to motivate them according to their respective needs as something needed by one group may or may 

not be needed by another group of faculty members. This gap in research has become inspiration of this 

research effort. We will also try to provide finding and suggestions to management of educational 

institutes, so that they can make rational decisions to increase job satisfaction of faculty members. 

In contrast with our study aims, we will try to explore the available researches on the given topic through 

the review of literature. We will try to gage the level job satisfaction among faculty members in term of 

the job, people along with staff works, supervision that they get salary, working environment, and the 

chances of promotion. Further, the relationship of overall job satisfaction with age, rank, tenure and 

gender will be investigated. 

2.LITERATURE REVIEW 

Literature review will take a look at various studies, which focus on the relationship of age, gender, tenure 

and rank with job satisfaction. 

2.1 Job Satisfaction and its Relationship with Gender 

Mason (1995) found Relationship between job satisfaction and gender has been studied by many 

researchers. Conversely many studies result is disagreement regarding the relationship of job satisfaction 

and sex of employees. Weaver (1974) observed higher number of men with greater satisfaction level than 

women. 

It is imperative to notice here, that study on this topic show no major difference between the two i.e. 

Gender and job satisfaction, keeping in view the statistical controlled factors (Golembiewski, 1977). The 

research result suggested by Centres and Bugental (1966) showed other deviations in change of values for 

both male and female were there on workplace. Female’s more desirable value was social factor of a job 

than to males’, on the other hand males demands expression in work. 


17




Study showed, women prefer pleasant employers to work with in comparison to men, whereas, to have a 

authority on important decision and opportunity, to direct the work for others is more desirable by men at 

work place (Schuler, 1975) 

Weaver (1977) confirms results for the hypothesis for unconnected link between two factors when the 

effect of other variables is minimized. Other researches from Forgionne and Peters (1982) found that 

there are many other factors which affects on this relation, it is not only gender and job satisfaction, we 

are talking about but also the other left over factors such as the number of family members, how many 

dependents are there in one’s family, furthermore which position is being held by the staff in the 

organization does matter on this relation. 

Conclusion was that the direct effect of other variables should be considered and the direct link between 

gender and its effect on job satisfaction appears very little. We cannot agree with satisfaction level 

difference between two when having equal chance for education employment promotion equal job 

opportunity and so on. According to DeSantis and Durst (1996) the outcome of researches lying on 

gender difference effect on job satisfaction is arguable from 1950s to date. 

2.2 Job Satisfaction and Rank 

Individual’s job role within organization is considered as its rank. This term is link with job seniority of a 

person in a business classification, any one in education sector, working as Professor, Associate 

Professor, Assistant Professor and Lecturer. According to Ronen (1978) professional level increases job 

satisfaction, eighteen (18) variables were examined to get the strong predictors of job satisfaction by Near 

et al (1978), he got the results that the occupational level in term of rank and age are powerful tool for a 

satisfied employee. 

Grimes (1997) took 102 economists who worked in US institution of higher learning and were PhDs as 

sample ,in order to test number of publications and job rank. Expected result of positive correlation 

between job rank and publishing was proved. On the other hand there is no effort made by researchers on 

the relationship between the job rank and job satisfaction. Job satisfaction, productivity and career 

activities were correlated through a sample of 293 psychologists were surveyed by Holden and Black 

(1996). Analysis shows that academic ranks effect on productivity and satisfaction. Assistant or associate 

professor are less productive and satisfied than full professor. Literature reveals that job satisfaction is 

related with rank, and staff at higher ranks tends to have high job satisfaction. Therefore, it is proposed by 

literature that rank have a greater impact on productivity and job satisfaction, the higher rank people are 

more satisfied than the lower rank employees. 

2.3 Job Satisfaction and Tenure 

Time period or number of years a person have spent working in an organization, is considered as Length 

of service. Many research studies designed to inspect that if the tenure increases the job satisfaction 

increase or not. The hypothesis that change in job satisfaction with length of service at a particular job 

resembles a U-shaped curve was confirmed by Ronen (1978), when researcher examined the relationship 

between two variables. Problem of promotion, salary policies and administrative practices as a hub of 

turnover was concluded by Nicholson and Miljus (1972) in their studies. However, satisfaction or 

dissatisfaction level of job was not directly associated with turnover and length of service by researchers. 

The idea that by controlling the perceived net value of employee for firm, employees’ length of service 

nurtures the protection in opposition to job loss was presented by Abraham and Medoff (1984). Ability in 

promotion process and length of service has a comparative importance is also verified by Abraham and 

Medoff (1985). To judge the job satisfaction promotion is consider as key variable and long tenure and 

job satisfaction is logically connected (Wanous, 1972). When workers are long established in their 

experience, the satisfaction level is high for both male and female, studied by Black and DiNitto (1994). 


18




Study on some firms in Hong Kong investigated to get the relationship of source of stress with 

psychological distress, job satisfaction and intension of quitting from job is directly the outcome of locus 

of control and organizational commitment (Siu and Cooper, 1998). On the other hand, the study on staff 

and nurses in UK was made to investigate the staff turnover ratio, staff age and tenure and found that 

tenure is a strongly associated with job satisfaction (Gray et.al, 1994) 

3. METHOD 

In order to extract data on job satisfaction of employees the JDI (Job Description Index) was used. In 

1969, JDI was developed by Kendall, Smith and Hulin. According to Kreitner and Kinicki (1995) this is 

most widely used tool to measure staff overall job satisfaction. Spector (2000) found JDI the most reliable 

tool to measure Job satisfaction level of employees, and it help us to measure the different aspects of job 

satisfaction separately from each other. JDI want respondents to explain jobs they perform compare to ask 

direct question “How much satisfied you are” in order to ensure that person filling the questionnaire 

should provide feedback which is related to job rather than satisfaction in general. The Job Description 

Index measudeal with five aspects for job satisfaction perceptions, Salary or pay, chances for promotions, 

supervision staff get in office, office mates or co-workers and the job staff performs (Spector, 2000). 

Seventy two (72) items have been included in this measuring instrument out of which ,nine (9) items are 

used for each aspect of promotion and pay, and eighteen (18) items each for work, supervision, and coworkers 

(Smucker & Kent, 2004). In order to get total score of the responses, employees are requested to 

specify whether each statement does or does not explain their jobs. The score of responses is measured as 

(yes) = 3, (?) = 1 and (no) = 0 for positive items, whereas (yes) = 0, (?) = 1, and (no) = 3 used for negative 

items (Cherrington, 1994). Job satisfaction level is related with the overall score, Satisfaction will be as 

high as the score (Kreitner & Kinicki, 2001). All questionnaires were distributed through post and emails. 

In order to find relationship among rank, age, gender and tenure with overall job satisfaction, The 

Multiple Regression Model was used. 

Overall Job Satisfaction (OJS) = β0+β1rank+β2gender+β3length+β4age+ ε 

4. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 

Table 1Dimensions of Job Satisfaction – Descriptive Statistics 

Frequency Minimum Maximum Mean Value Standard Deviation 

Job 191 15 45 39.01 5.842 

Pay 191 5 32 16.52 5.926 

Supervision 191 12 45 33.59 6.014 

Promotion 191 5 23 13.87 2.310 

People 191 9 48 29.66 9.554 

Valid N (list 

wise) 

191 

Faculty members are satisfied with the nature of work (mean = 39.01), coworkers (mean = 29.66) as well 

as the supervision (mean =33.59) they get in their institute. The mean values of pay and promotion 

subscales were 16.52 and 13.87 respectively, both values reflects that our respondents are less satisfied 

with pay they receive and the chances of promotion they get in their institutes. 


19




Table 2: Rank 

Frequency % Valid % Cumulative % 

Valid Professor 30 15.7 15.7 15.7 

Associate professor 24 12.6 12.6 28.3 

Assistant professor 48 25.1 25.1 53.4 

Lecturer 89 46.6 46.6 100.0 

Total 191 100.0 100.0 

Table 2 shows the classifications of ranks of the respondents, the sample consists upon Professor (15.73 

%, n= 30), Assistant Professor (25.1%, n= 48), and Lecturer (46.6%, n= 89) 

Table 3: Race 


Valid Sindhi 98 51.3 51.3 51.3 

Punjabi 50 26.2 26.2 77.5 

Pashtoon 23 12.0 12.0 89.5 

Baloch 20 10.5 10.5 100.0 

Total 191 100.0 100.0 

The Table 3 reflects the composition of sample in term of race, where is clear that Sindhi faculty 

members mostly participated in the research (51.3 %, n = 98), Punjabi 26.2 %, n= 50) and Pashtoon were 

around 12% (n= 23). Baloch were the least represented group (n=20, 10.5%) 

Table 4 :Education 


Valid 0 1 .5 .5 .5 

Phd 44 23.0 23.0 23.6 

MS 47 24.6 24.6 48.2 

MBA 99 51.8 51.8 100.0 

Total 191 100.0 100.0 

Table 4 shows the education level of sample, As far as the education level of respondents is concerned , 

majority of respondents were PhD (23%, n= 44) , 24.6% (n = 47) has MS and 51.8 % of sample are MBA 

Table 5 depicts the distribution of sample according to gender. The Male respondents represent larger in 

number compare to female respondents. Almost 78.4% (n= 149) respondents were male compare to 

(21.6%, n= 41) of female respondents. The high response rate from male is attributed to the reality that 

majority of faculty teaching in business institutes are male. 


20




Table 5 : Gender 


Valid Male 149 78.0 78.4 78.4 

Female 41 21.5 21.6 100.0 

Total 190 99.5 100.0 

Missing 1 .5 

Total 191 100.0 

Table 6: Age 

Frequency Percent Valid Percent 

Cumulative 

Percent 

Valid 25-30 42 22.0 22.1 22.1 

31-35 73 38.2 38.4 60.5 

36-40 36 18.8 18.9 79.5 

41-45 17 8.9 8.9 88.4 

46-50 14 7.3 7.4 95.8 

51-55 3 1.6 1.6 97.4 

>55 5 2.6 2.6 100.0 

Total 190 99.5 100.0 

Missing System 1 .5 

Total 191 100.0 

Tables 6 demonstrate sample’s age distribution. The major part of sample 38.4% , n= 73 was of the age 

group between 31-35. Only 1.5%, n= 3 respondents belong to the age group of 51-55 years (being the 

minority of the respondents). One respondent did not mentioned his/ her age.. From the following results 

it can be understood that the major part of sample consisted upon the faculty which represent the young 

cohort of age ranging from 25-35 years. 

Table 7 shows the sample composition in term of their tenure (Years of service), almost 104 respondents 

54.5% belong to service group of 1-5 years of service. 18.3 % of sample fall in to the service group of 6- 

10 years. The service group of 31-35 years service group represent the smallest cohort (n=3). 

Table 8 present Pearson correlation results among age, tenure, gender, and rank with overall job 

satisfaction level of sample, which is measured with JDI (Job Description Index). The coefficients of 

correlation varied from -0.162 (Gender) and 0.724(age).Te Ranks and job satisfaction level of the 

respondents was significantly correlated (r=-0.828 at Significance level of 0.01, p< 0.01). On the other 

side age and job satisfaction level was also strongly correlated and significant (p< 0.01) (r= 0.724) as well 

as tenure & Job satisfaction (r=0.712) (p




Table 7: Tenure 

Frequency Percent Valid Percent 

Cumulative 

Percent 

Valid 0 3 1.6 1.6 1.6 

1-5 years 104 54.5 54.5 56.0 

6-10 35 18.3 18.3 74.3 

11-15 8 4.2 4.2 78.5 

16-20 12 6.3 6.3 84.8 

21-25 12 6.3 6.3 91.1 

26-30 14 7.3 7.3 98.4 

31-35 3 1.6 1.6 100.0 

Total 191 100.0 100.0 

Table 8: Job Satisfaction & Biographical Data – Pearson Correlation 

Overall Job Satisfaction 

Rank Pearson Correlation -.828 ** 

Sig.(2-tailed) .000 

N 191 

Gender Pearson Correlation -.162 * 


N 190 

Age Pearson Correlation .724 ** 


N 190 

Tenure Pearson Correlation .712 ** 


N 191 

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2 – tailed) 

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 – tailed) 

Table 9 depicts the Pearson correlations for the relationship among different aspects of job satisfaction of 

faculty members, which were assessed through JDI. The strongest correlation was found for coworkers 

“the people along with faculty members work with” (r = 0.724). The factor of pay showed weak but 

positive relationship with job satisfaction (r= 0.278).Whereas, a strong correlation was obtained among 

Job itself and job satisfaction of faculty members (r= 0.626), the weakest correlation was obtained among 

promotion and job satisfaction (r= 0.248). But the relationship among supervision and job satisfaction 

was found significant (p < 0.01) . 


22




Table 9: Aspects of Job Satisfaction -Pearson Correlation Matrix 

Overall Job Satisfaction 

Job Pearson Correlation .626 ** 


N 191 

Pay Pearson Correlation .278 ** 


N 191 

Supervision Pearson Correlation .504 ** 


N 191 

Promotion Pearson Correlation .248 ** 


N 191 

People Pearson Correlation .724 ** 


N 191 

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2 – tailed) 

** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2 – tailed) 

Multiple Regression Analysis 

In order to determine the impact of rank, gender, age and tenure on job satisfaction level of faculty 

members, multiple regression analysis was performed. 

Table 10: Multiple Regression Model 

Model R R- Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the Estimate 

1 .834 .696 .680 1.770 

Table 10 present the results of multiple regression analysis, where demographic variables (independent 

variables) are regressed against the job satisfaction (dependent variable).The R square is about 0.696 and 

adjusted R square is 0.680. Therefore the model can explain 68 % variation in dependent variable (Job 

satisfaction) due to demographic independent variables, so 32 % variance in job satisfaction is caused by 

other factors which are not included in the study. 

Table 11: Multiple Regression Model 

Model β SE t Sig 

1 (Constant) 35.671 1.620 21.877 .000 

rank -2.781 0.333 -8.339 .000 

gender .151 0.301 .473 .636 

age .098 0.171 .539 .591 

tenure -.374 0.178 -2.099 .037 


23




The values of individual Beta’s are given in table 11, Tenure got negative Beta weight of –(0.374), which 

suggest job satisfaction and tenure of staff is negatively related ( inverse), with more tenure are 

experiencing lower job satisfaction level. The Beta weight of age is positive (0.098), which suggest that 

older faculty members have higher level of job satisfaction. Gender was found to be not statistically 

significant. Thus among faculty members of business institutes of Pakistan it is observed that rank and 

employee tenure are significant to predict level of job satisfaction, on the other side staff age and gender 

are weak predictors of job satisfaction among the faculty members. 

5. CONCLUSION 

This research provides the evidence of an empirical study; where the impact of age, gender, rank and job 

tenure on job satisfaction of business institutes was explored. Job Satisfaction is key to individual as well 

as organizational success. Faculty members like other employees have certain issues when it’s come to 

job satisfaction. This study was conducted to explore deep in to this context through Job description 

Index, the faculty members working in business institutes of Pakistan (from four provinces namely, 

Sindh, Punjab, KPK and Baluchistan) have shown their satisfaction with coworkers, nature of work , and 

supervision they received in their institutes. The study found Pay and chances for promotion is the causes 

of job dissatisfaction among the participants of the study. Tenure of staff and their rank was significantly 

associated with the overall level of job satisfaction (p




Cherrington, D.J. (1994). Organizational Behavior (2 nd ed.) Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. 

Clark. A.E. (1997), “ Job satisfaction and gender: why women so happy at work?”, Labour Economics, 

Vol. 4, pp. 341-72. 

DeSantis, V.S. and Durst, S.L. (1996), “Comparing job satisfaction among public and private sector 

employees”, American Review of Public Administration, Vol. 26 No.3, pp.327-43. 

Doering, M., Rhodes, S.R. and Schuster, M. (1983), The Ageing Workforce, Sage Publication, Berverly 

Hills, CA. 

Forgionne, G.A. and Peeters, V.E. (1982), “Differnce in job motivation and satisfaction among female 

and male managers”, Human Relations, Vol. 35 No. 2, pp. 101-18. 

F.J. Lacy and B.A. Shaheen, “Job Satisfaction among Academic staff: An International Perspective”, 

Higher Education, Vol. 34, No. 3, 1997, Pp. 305-322. 

Gibson, J.L. and Klein, S.M. (1970), “Employee attitude as a function of age and length of service: a reconceptualization”, 

Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 13, pp.411-25. 

Glenn, N.D., Taylor, R.D. and Weaver, C.N. (1977), “Age and job satisfaction among males and females: 

a multivariate multi-study study”, Journal of applied Psychology, Vol. 62, pp. 189-93. 

Goh, C.T., Koh, H.C. and Low, C.K. (1991), “Gender effects on the job satisfaction accountants in 

singapore”, Work and Stress, Vol. 5 No.. 4, pp. 341-8. 

Golembiewski, R. (1977), “Testing some sterrotypes about the sexes in organizations: differential 

satisfaction with work?”, Human Resourse Management, Vol. 16, pp. 30-2. 

Gray, A.M. and Philips, V.L. (1994), “Turnover, age and length of service: a comparison of nurses and 

other staff in the National Health Service”, Journal of Advanced Nursing, Vol. 19, pp. 819-27. 

Grimes, P.W. and Register, C.A. (1997), “Career Publication and Academic job rank: evidence from the 

classes of 1968”, Journal of Economic Education, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 82-93. 

Gujrati, D.N. (1995), Basic Econometrics, 3 rd ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, NY. 

Hickson, C. and Oshagbemi, T. (1999), “The effect of age on the satisfaction of academics with teaching 

and research”, International Journal of Social Econmics, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 537-44. 

Holden, E.W. and Black, M.M. (1996), “Psychologists in Medical Schools- professionla issues for the 

future: how are rank and tenure associated with productivity and satisfaction?”, Professional 

Psychology: Research and Practice, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 407-14. 

Hulin, C.L. and Smith, P.C. (1964), Sex differences in job satisfaction”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 

Vol. 48, pp. 88-92. 

Hulin, C.L. and Smith, P.C. (1965), A linear model of job satisfaction”, ”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 

Vol. 49, pp. 209-16. 

Imparato, N. (1972), “Relationship between Porter’s need satisfaction: questionnaire and the job 

descriptive index”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 56 No. 5, pp. 397-405. 

Jurgensen, C. (1978), “Job preferences: what makes a job good and bad?”, Journal of Applied 

Psychology, Vol. 63, pp.267-76. 

J.K. Dua, “Job Stressors and their Effects on Physical Health, Emotional Health, and Job Satisfactionin a 

University”, Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 32, No. 1, 1994, Pp. 59-78. 

Keith, P. and Glass, L. (1977), “Sex differences in the perception of job factors”, College Student Journal 

Vol. 11, pp. 43-8. 

Kreitner, R., &Kinicki, A. (1995). Organizational Behavior (3 rd ed.). New York: Irwin, Inc. 

Kreitner, R., &Kinicki, A. (2001). Organizational Behavior (5 th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Inc. 

Kuhlen, R.G. (1963), “Needs, perceived need satisfaction opportunities”, Journal of Applied Psychology, 

Vol. 47, pp. 56-64. 

Larkin, J.M. (1990), “Does gender affects internal auditors’ performance?”, The Woman CPA, Vol.52, pp. 

20-4. 

Lee, R. and Wilbur, E. (1985), “Age, educatio, job tenure, salary, job characterstics, and job satisfaction: 

a multivariate analysis”, Human Relations, Vol. 38, pp. 781-91. 


25




Locke, E.A. (1976), “The nature and causes of job satisfaction”, in Dunnette, M.D. (Ed.), Handbook of 

Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL, pp.1297-343. 

Locke, E.A. and Henne, D. (1986), “Work motivation theories”, in cooper, C.L. and Roberston, I. (Eds), 

International Review of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Wiley, London, pp. 1-35. 

Lofquist, L.H. and Dawis, R.V. (1969), Adjustment to Work-A Psychological View of Man’s Problems in 

a work-Oriented Society, Appleton Century Crofts, New York, NY. 

Luthans, F. and Thomas, L.T. (1989), “ The relationship between age and job satisfaction: curvilinear 

results from an empirical study-a research note”, Personnel Review, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 23-6. 

McCarney, M., Edwards, S. and Jones, R. (1977), “The influence of ethnolinguistic group membership, 

sex and position level on motivational orientation of Canadian Anglophone and Francophone 

employees”, Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, Vol. 9, pp. 274-82. 

McNay, I. (1997), “The impact of the 1992 RAE on institutional and individual behavior in English 

Higher Education: the evidence from research project”, Centre of Higher Educational 

Management, Anglia Polytechnic University, Norwich. 

Mason, E.S. (1995), “Gender differences in job satisfaction”, The Journal of Social Psychology, Vol. 135 

No. 2, pp. 143-51. 

Miles, E.W., Patrick, S.L. and W.C. (1996), “Job level as a systemic variable in predicting the 

relationship between supervisory communication and job satisfaction”, Journal of Occupational 

and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 69 No. 3, pp. 277-92. 

Mottaz, C.J. (1986), “Gender differences in work satisfaction, work-related rewards and values, and the 

determinants of work satisfaction “, Human Relations, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 359-78. 

Nathanson, I.L. and Eggleton, E. (1993), “Motivation versus program effect on length of service: a study 

of four cohorts of ombudservice volunteers”, Journal of Gerontological Social Work, Vol. 19 No. 

¾, pp. 95-114. 

Near, J.P., Rice, R.W. and Hunt, R.G. (1972), “Work and extra work correlates of life and job 

satisfaction”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. 21, pp. 248-64. 

Nicholson, E.A. and Miljus, R.C. (1972), “Job satisfaction and turnover among liberal arts college 

professors”, Personnel Journal, Vol. 51, pp. 840-5. 

O’Brien, G.E. and Dowling, P. (1981), “Age and job satisfaction”, Australian Psychologist, Vol. 16 No. 

1, pp. 49-61. 

Porter, L.W., Lawler, E.E. and Hackman, J.R. (1975), Behaviour in Organizations, McGraw-Hill, New 

York, NY. 

Quinn, R.P., Staines, G.L. and McCullough, M.R. (1974), “Job satisfaction: is there a trend”, in, 

Manpower Research Monograph No. 30, US Department of Labour, Washington, DC. 

Rhodes, S.R. (1978), “Age-related differences in work attitudes and behaviour: a review and conceptual 

analysis”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 93, pp. 328-67. 

Ronen, S. (1978), “Job satisfaction and the neglected variable of job seniority”, Human Relation, Vol. 31 

No. No. 4, pp. 297-308. 

Scarpello, V. and Campbell, J.P. (1983), “Job satisfaction: are the parts there?”, Personnel Psychology, 

Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 577-600. 

Smucker, M.K., & Kent, A. (2004). The influence of referent selection on pay, promotion, supervision, 

work, and co-worker satisfaction across three distinct sport industry segments [Electronic 

Version]. International Sports Journal, 8 (1), 27. 

Schuler, R.S. (1975), “Sex organizational level and outcome importance: where the differences are”, 

Personnel Psychology, Vol. 28, pp. 365-76. 

Spector, P.E. (2000). Industrial and Organizational Psychological: Research and practice. New York: 

John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 

Schneider, B., Gunnarson, S.K. and Wheeler, J.K. (1992), “The role of opportunity in the 

conceptualization and measurement of job satisfaction”, in Cranny, C.J., Smith, P.C. and Stone, 

E.F. (Eds), Job Satisfaction: How People Feel About Their Jobs and How it Affects Their 

Performance, Lexington, New York, NY, pp. 53-68. 


26




Schneider, B., Reichers, A.E. and Mitchell, T.M. (1982), “A note on some relationship between the 

aptitude requirements and reward attributes of tasks”, Academy of Management Journal, Vol. pp. 

561-74. 

Shapiro, J. and Stern, L. (1975), “Job Satisfaction: male and female, professional and non-professional 

workers”, Personnel Journal, Vol. 54, pp. 388-9. 

Siassi, I., Crocetti, G. and Spiro, H.R. (1975), “Emotional health, life and job satisfaction in ageing 

workers”, Industrial Gerentology, Vol. 2, pp. 289-96. 

Siu, O. and Cooper, C.L. (1998), “A study of occupational stress, job satisfaction and quitting intention in 

Hong Kong Firms: the role of locus of control and organizational commitment”. Stress Medicine, 

Vol. 14, pp. 49-54. 

Sloane, P. and Williams, H. (1996), “Are Overpaid’ workers really unhappy? A test of the theory of 

cognitive dissonance”,Labour, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 3-15. 

Smith, D.B. and Plant, W.T. (1982), “Sex differences in the job satisfactionn of university 

professors”,Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 67 No. 2, pp. 249-51. 

Smith P.C., Kendall, L.M. and Hulin, C.L. (1969), The Measurement of Satisfaction in Work and 

Retirement: A Strategy for the Study of Attitudes, Rand McNally, Chicago, IL. 

Smith P.C., Kendall, L.M. and Hulin, C.L. (1975), The Job Descriptive Index, Psychology Department, 

Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH. 

Smith P.C., Kendall, L.M. and Hulin, C.L. (1985), The Revised Job Descriptive Index, Rand McNally, 

Chicago, IL. 

Stagner, R. (1975), “Boredom on the assembly line: age and personality variables”, Industrial 

Gerontology, Vol. 2, pp. 23-44. 

Staines, G.L. and Quinn, R.P. (1979), “American workers evaluate the quality of their jobs”, Monthly 

Labour Review, Vol. 102, pp. 3-12. 

Times Higher Education Supplement (1998), University female participation, 8 May, p. 5. 

Wanous, J.P. and Lawler, E.D. III (1972), “Measurement and meaning of job satisfaction”, Journal of 

Applied Psychology, Vol. 56 No. 2, pp. 95-105. 

Ward, M. and Sloane, P. (1998), Job Satisfaction: The case of the Scottish Academy Profession, mimeo, 

University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen. 

Weaver, C.N. (1974, “Correlates of job satisfaction: some evidence from the national surveys”, Academy 

of Management Journal, Vol. 17, pp. 373-5. 

Weaver, V.N. (1977), “Relationships among pay, race, sex, occupational prestige, supervision, work, 

autonomy and job satisfaction in a national sample”, Personnel Psychology, Vol. 30, pp. 437-45. 

Weaver, C.N. (1978), “Sex differences in the determinants of job satisfaction”, Academy of Management 

Journal, Vol. 21 No. 2, pp. 265-74. 

Witt, L.A. and Nye, L.G. (1992), “Gender and relationship between perceived fairness of pay or 

promotion and job satisfaction”, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 77 No. 6, pp. 910-7. 

Woodward, M. (1983), “On forecasting grade, age and length of service distributions in manpower 

systems”, Journal of Royal Statistical Society Series A- Statistics in Society, Vol. 146 No. 11, pp. 

74-84. 

Wright, J.D. and Hamilton, R.F. (1978), :Work satisfaction and age: some evidence for the job change 

hypothesis”, Social Forces, Vol. 56 No. 4, pp. 1140-58. 


27

Relationship of Age, Gender, Tenure, Rank and Job Satisfaction ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?